Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2010/01/09
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]On Jan 9, 2010, at 4:25 PM, Jeff Moore wrote: > 2010-01-09-17:13:15 Steve Barbour: >> On Jan 9, 2010, at 1:34 PM, Jeff Moore wrote: >>> It bugged me that the list wasn't sorted by... anything I could discern. >> >> the order above is from the least expensive to the most.... > > Oh, yeah. I should've tried re-reading the text before loosing my > email with that afterthought phrase. Because the thing which bugged me > the most was that the sort wasn't on perceived quality, which was the > ranking I was most interested in (and of course there's actually no > guarantee that that's precisely what these composite overall numbers > represent, since they also reportedly include a "bang-for-the buck" > component). Having pulled the list out of the text and re-ordered it, I > didn't go back to the original article. My bad. no problem, it probably got more attention this way, :-) thanks, Steve > > -J > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information